Dean Smith (WA, Liberal Party) Share this | Hansard source

I also rise to make a brief contribution on the tabling of the Joint Standing Committee on Northern Australia's interim report, Never again. I begin by acknowledging the PKKP people and the loss of such a foundational feature of their heritage due to Rio Tinto's destruction of the Juukan Gorge. Their anger and grief is shared by every Australian, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous. In my additional comments to this report, I've consciously focused on two critical areas. The first is the importance of continuing to hold Rio Tinto accountable for its deliberate and destructive actions. I'm sure I speak for many, many people who believe Rio Tinto's remorse has been shallow and still shows an outrageously poor understanding of the consequences of Rio's actions. The second is ensuring that the actions of Rio Tinto, and Rio alone, do not result in a significant loss of confidence in the goodwill and progress that has been made on resource development and Indigenous issues over many decades in my home state of Western Australia. It is necessary to remind people that WA's resource and mining industry does not just power the Western Australian and national economies; it is a critical element in enabling the empowerment of Indigenous people across my home state.

Rio Tinto still needs to be held accountable. In its final report, the committee intends to comment further on Rio Tinto's time line prior to the destruction of the Juukan Gorge, but it's important to canvass Rio Tinto's conduct now, to hold those responsible accountable, to end the uncertainty for those involved and to enable the deep wounds this incident has caused to begin healing. As far as I'm concerned, Rio Tinto, including its chairman and its board, are still on notice. They should not allow themselves to believe the investigation into their culpability has concluded. In brief, it took nearly 20 days for Rio's Chief Executive, Mr Jacques, to make a public apology following the event. Even then, he apologised only for the distress caused. It was not until Rio Tinto made a submission to the inquiry that he acknowledged the destruction of Juukan Gorge should not have occurred. In my additional comments I have called for Rio Tinto to review why this took so long and for those within the organisation who argued for only apologising for the distress caused to reconsider their positions within the industry.

My additional comments also highlight the actions of Rio Tinto in the days prior to the event. In their submission, the PKKP asserts:

PKKP do not accept Rio Tinto's position that, before May 2020, it was unaware of the ethnographic and archaeological significance of the Juukan Gorge. Neither does PKKP accept that if Rio Tinto had known the 'new information' contained in … [the] further report dated 18 May 2020 it would not have proceeded with the blast.

I agree with PKKP. The fact that Rio removed seven explosives to prevent committing an offence under section 17 of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 but none of the explosives that destroyed Juukan Gorge amplifies this view, I believe.

The board review was insufficient. Rio Tinto must more genuinely and independently review its actions and be honest with the PKKP and the Australian community. This is a board that employed and oversaw the contract of Mr Jacques, who created a 'fit in or F-off' culture at Rio Tinto. Those who supported him through this period should resign and exit the WA mining industry. The actions of Rio Tinto have tarnished the whole resource and mining industry in Western Australia and beyond. This is the most disappointing element of the inquiry: Rio Tinto has positioned itself as a moral leader in the industry, including funding political campaigns to influence others, yet, when a practical test of respecting Aboriginal culture arose, it failed—capital F failed.

We can continue to hold Rio Tinto accountable and deliver regulatory certainty for WA's resource and mining industry. No-one would be surprised by the combined emphasis of my additional comments in the report. Evidence to the committee indicates there is room for improvement across the industry in relation to agreement-making with traditional owners. But I disagree that part of the solution is a moratorium on section 18 approvals, which are a vital process to enable development in WA. In these economic times it is wrong to create uncertainty for the resource and mining industry, the pastoral and other industries and government agencies that use the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 to facilitate development. A full moratorium would put at risk or halt METRONET, the Perth Airport runway and countless resource and other job-creating projects across the state. I believe it is a step too far and its inclusion represents a sovereign risk.

It's important to highlight that the final decision-maker on section 18 approvals is the WA Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, the Hon. Ben Wyatt MLA. I have confidence in his ability to ensure that adequate consideration is given to the views of traditional owners. The WA government is already progressing key reforms to address the issues identified in the report, with the replacement of the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972. It has released a draft bill that has been subject to exhaustive consultation with industry and traditional owners. I have confidence in the process to date and what this bill will achieve.

Rio Tinto's conduct does not represent that of the entire industry. Rather than a regulatory overreach and punishing the entire industry and Indigenous people for Rio Tinto's failures, we should instead use this terrible event as a catalyst to improve agreement-making with traditional owners. At all times, the guiding principle must be the empowerment of local communities to make their local decisions. The work of this inquiry has been important, and its future contribution will be critical in restoring the trust that Rio Tinto has so willingly and knowingly destroyed. I seek leave to continue my remarks later.

Leave granted.